Posts by nsld 870 publicly visible posts • joined 10 Jun 2009
You register for VAT
You import goods from within the EU so pay no VAT
You sell the goods on plus VAT to UK businesses
You close up the business very quickly before the VAT man is due to be paid and you get out of dodge.
What the article misses out on is the companies that bought the goods but now cant reclaim the VAT
Is they are a blunt instrument unsuited to the current problems the economy faces.
Prices are not high due to general demand, they are high due to the cost of supply., especially, fuel and commodoties.
Suppressing peoples ability to buy fuel and food wont bring down price inflation as the inflationary pressure is outside our control.
What an interest rate rise will do is give impetus to the banks to massively raise interest rates, especially on unsecured debts like credit cards and overdrafts. A 0.25% rate rise from the Bank of England will trigger rises across those markets of between 3 and 5%!
The current oil price is speculator driven, supply hasnt diminished, but the futures market is using political instability to drive prices despite the oil producers like Saudi taking up the slack from Libyan output.
But the issue with oil is a red herring as well, the goverment has driven inflation with a VAT rise and fuel duty increases and thats just on fuel, the overall VAT rise has pushed prices across the board as well, making the average mortgage more expensive wont bring down prices when the two factors affecting the price (commodites and taxes) wont be impacted.
The reason for this is purely commercial and it comes back to the subscription rake off plans apple introduced a few weeks ago.
Full performace of web apps would negate the requrement to offer an App from the Itunes store with the in app purchase and forced price fixing.
So anyone with subscriber content doesnt need to offer any form of Itunes purchase or sub rake off.
So if your a newspaper, magazine etc or any other sub or payment service you can web app instead and avoid the iTax.
I will of course get flamed by the fanboi for pointing this out but it follows all the other steps apple have taken including the price fixing of in app and out of app purchasing.
Apple have already seen subscriber based content providers moving to web apps since the announcement so its no surprise really.
All legal cases are X v. Y in English courts
But most people dont get that and the term "versus" has moved into more common usage outside the courtroom, probably due to its use in many merkin TV drama's
I probably should have written
" I would refer you to response in the matter of Arkell v. Pressdram (1971)"
I shall now await the rise of the pedants as IANAL either.
at least have the decency to put your name to it rathern than being an AC.
Our faith school has no requirement for us to be believers, if it did we wouldnt be using it, there is no requirement to attend church or sunday school and my kids dont.
Fortunately the school isnt as prejudiced or stupid as you clearly are in terms of the pupil intake.
Whether you like it or not religion is part of life, ignoring it wont make it go away, far better to be educated and informed than to be an idiot, its an approach you might want to try.
Because, to put it bluntly your not the sharpest tool in the shed.
My kids go to the local "faith" based primary for no other reason than it is streets ahead of all the other schools in the town.
We arent a religious family but we are clever enough to realise that the school is good, the general social values it teaches are excellent and the kids love it.
I still have my ZX81 and Spectrum kicking around, my later mother got me the ZX81 as she could see that computers would be the future.
I remember my ram pack wobble and my first ribbon cable as well, plus the Thermal printer.
Nothing better than using that sodding keyboard to manually type in games programmes from the magazines for hours on end, only for the ram pack to wobble before you saved it.
Actually the difference is the Telco's are open on what the costs are when doing charity based work, for example with sms donation its often £1 plus your sms fee from the operator with the full £1 to charity, so if your on a huge text bundle you know your contribution isnt getting skimmed.
If Comic Relief wanted a donation app would it be ok for apple to say that they cant say its for charity and take 30%?
Apple wont decline apps for charitable purposes becuase it likes the 30%, do you think thats ethical?
Dont you think it would be more appropriate to block all apps that give to charity?
That Apple only go as far as not letting them tell clients some goes to charity, still able to take the 30% off the top of the purchase though.
Part of the reason they dont want to do this is they would have to admit they skim 30%, can you imagine if a telco did that to Comic Relief?
Apple dont host the content for a magazine subscription.
The publisher already has all of the items you describe already, they dont need to pay someone else 30% to do the same sub management and sign up again, along with having no access to subscriber data.
You need to think outside the walled garden the content providers does more than just provide to Apple and they still need all the infrastructure etc.
Those magazines have paid a developer to develop and app to make life easier for Apple Customers.
Apple benefit from that investment because Apple need apps to sell the iStuff.
What your ignoring are the benefits Apple get off the App providers.
You forget the app store was never in the revenue stream, the apps are added benefits to existing subscribers who own hamstrung apple kit.
In your blank magazine scenario you convenientally forget that Apple have been paid handsomely for the blank iMag in the first place.
Another worshipper at the church of the arse of the magic elephant.
The "free" digital content of which you speak, perchance does it require writers, researchers, photographers, sub editors, etc etc ad infinitum?
That content, perchance does it require servers, bandwidth, maintenance? Does the bandwidth cometh for free at your church?
And this free content, how does it get marketed and promoted? Does your magic elephant do free advertising as well?
Forsooth, the arse of the magic elephant is verily a phenomenal tool, it can do so much for free I will be recommending it to all publishers and other purveyors of content and we can look forward to articles with the byline "from the arse of the magic elephant"
Ralph
The fundamental difference for a subscription model service from any of the larger providers is that they already pay to manage subscriptions and distribute content etc, same with a SaaS provider, Apple arent taking over the SaaS infrastructure or client delivery.
What most of the sub model apps do is provide a way of Apple customers actually being able to use there hardware, you need to remember that the browsing experience in the iOS world is pretty poor due to the restrictions apple place on its products.
You also need to consider that most companies dont target one gadget user base so still need the infrastructure in place and with the economies of scale that they have its going to be way cheaper than paying 30% to Apple.
For example if your a newspaper with a monthly sub of £10 per month, if its collected by direct debit the cost is around 1p, debit card its 25 pence and credit card 2.5% so 25 pence. You then have your costs of distribution and your infrastructure to consider. Apple are not hosting the daily content or other items for you, they merely provide the app source so the cost of the £10 per month sub done in App is £3 per month or £36 per year, thats a lot for a sub engine compared to 12 pence per year for a direct debit.
If Apple where taking over the hosting and distribution of the content, management of the servers etc etc 30% would be fine, but for nothing more than a billing engine and an app hosting its a joke.
Its also pretty disingenious to say that Apple are bringing customers to the established brands in publishing, its actually the reverse, those brands are giving Apple users the opportunity to use there hamstrung products.
Its not about app purchases, its about a business with a subscription model who offers its clients an app for convenience.
Take health clubs for example, you need to subscribe to be able to use what is essentially a private app, thats a customer the business already has, why should that business be forced to use a payment channel that is not value for money (1 pence per month for a direct debit versus 30% of what might be a £100 sub!) when the app isnt there to bring new business.
Many companies have to provide apps for the convenience of clients who use Apple and have a neutured web browsing experience.
Apple need Apps to sell its products, but the Apps from major brand names will dry up if they are forced to use a payment channel (and thats all it is) with a huge cost on its back.
Its no different to ryan air claiming the card charge pays for the web booking service etc etc.
The salesforce App is the same, you only use it once your a customer of sales force, can you see SF surrendering 30% of the sub just to make a convenient app for its customers who choose to use Apple?
Chad, we are not talking low level one man developer fart apps.
You buy a subscription to GQ (for example) because you like GQ.
GQ still have to host, develop and deliver the content, an in app sign up is nothing more than another way of paying.
Apple isnt bring the customer to GQ, the app provider has given a means for an Apple Customer to use the hamstrung bit of shiny they own.
Thats the difference, Apple are not advertising or bringing new customers to the subscribed content the content provider is actually giving apple a feature for its customers to use.
Your example is flawed, Apple doesnt act as an estate agent as its not trying to bring you new business or sell your house it just sells the hardware and demands the transaction goes through them regardless of the source of the deal.
So a magazine/paper/other subscription service which hosts and delivers its own content can take 100% of the money from a web site sign up, or 70% if its done via an app?
Please do explain how giving 30% to Apple is in some way better value when they have to have all the other infrastructure in place anyway?
I think the problem is Chad that you dont understand the difference between a 99c fart app and a recurring subscription to a content service delivered over the web through an existing distro channel.
This new approach by apple is aimed squarely at the big subscription vendors, but ultimately its short sighted, all they are going to do is drop "apps" and move over to a web browser experience for content and sign up, what you forget is that not everyone uses or wants an iPhone/Pad.
Developers with no distro channel are going to pay, but if your a large publisher with your own clearly established distro channel and content delivery you dont need to have an app, just use a browser.
The Apple tactic was to get enough content providers onto there itunes platform with an "app" and then force them to use iTunes to sell the content the app views.
The content is still coming from the infrastructure of the publishers, they still need to host it and maintain it so the 30% is an additional levy.
To all the fanbois telling the world you cant build a distro channel for 30%, what distro channel do you think the publishers currently use? Do you think the subscription content already out there eminates from the arse of a magic elephant? Of course it doesnt, they already have both subscription and distribution channels!
Apple has used those early app providers to sell devices, now it has them it wants to force a new distro channel for content on them, the publishers dont need an in app sub service, they have a perfectly good one already.
What Apple have missed is that the App aspect of subscriber viewing isnt that large, all the content providers have to do is make it a sign in web page viewable on Safari, job done with no jobsian tax.
Ultimately this puts app creators out of business but Apple arent averse to a little collateral damage, they will just pop some iNets around the developers buildings to catch them when they jump!
To allow for the fines to be deducted from the pension pots of the heads of department and the Chief Executive(s) of the council and if any consultants or other organisations where involved in the policy/process for them to be fined as well.
That way even the kevlar proofed life time civil servants have some accountability and feel the pain of there errors.
It doesnt give the consumer more choice, it forces the content provider to run purchases through I tunes and pay 30% of any of that transaction to Apple.
If the consumer wants the content they can buy it via the website, they dont need the additional "choice" of the iTunes store.
What needs to happen is the content providers need to comply but charge 100% more for purchases through iTunes and within the App explain that the same content is available for less outside the iTunes store and then give the customer the "choice" you speak of.
That way the content provider doesnt lose out, Apple gets its pound of flesh for anyone who does buy in App and everyone is happy.
If its not already in the T's and C's I bet you will see a new rule that prices must be the same in and out of app fairly soon.
So to allow people with no visa/mastercard/cardofchoice for e commerce all vendors must pay the iTax of 30% to allow people to use Apples gift cards!
Plus Apple has already moved to block access to content paid for elsewhere with the Belgian newspapers which appeared to be a test to dip the toe in the water of forcing content payment, delivery and iAd addition exclusively through iTunes.
If Apple wanted to serve its Ios customers it would let them access content via apps thats been paid for elsewhere becuase that gives them choice.
What you have highlighted at the end of your comment is the very lucrative market outside iTunes that Apple would like to get a 1/3rd of for all its devices.
Two key reasons I dont buy Apple products, they tell me whats good for me to install , and they tell me where to shop, what next ? telling us when to eat, sleep and take a dump?
I have to ask Michael, do you work for Apple or one of its PR firms?
Is not the medium, its the process of the operator.
A front line tech should not be able to delete anything.
Even at the delete stage you have a stasis period and you also supply the client with a data copy
After a period ot time and the delvery of the data you can delete the stuff.
The other key issue is price, you get what you pay for, pay $20 a year or zip and you will get a chimp thumping the keyboard and no DR in place.
Combine bad process and cheap as chips client demands and you have a recipe for disaster.
Being able to curl up in bed wasnt one of the points I was answering in the OP so your additional caveat is at best moot and at worst just self justification for your purchase.
And secondly, my kids 5, 7 and 9 have netbooks and they seem quite happy curling up in bed watching cbeebies iplayer without any chin related injuries.
I can only assume you look like Jimmy Hill, which may go someway to explaining why your iPad is the most important thing you take to bed.
In conclusion then, you have a large chin, your single, and my 5 year old is more neuroligically adept in that he can watch a netbook without twatting himself in the face!
I can do all those things on my £200 Acer Netbook running Linux without the need for any "apps" or itunes.
Does your pad thingy have any USB ports or a webcam built in?
Remind me again what you paid to be bent over and assimillated into the collective?
Dont get me wrong, the iPad is a lovely gadget and great fun for large screen angry birds but re read all the hoops you have to jump through to do basic every day stuff and explain the true benefit.
If they had referred to Mexicans as gun toting, drug dealing, mass murdering lunatics it would have been ok given the number of drug related murders in that fine country.
In terms of equality Top Gear has never discriminated against anyone, they abuse all and sundry in equal measure.
Nice to see an ambulance chasing lawyer joining the fun in the name of equality, clearly not doing it for the money.
They need to make it harder to delete in that the process should require more than a phone call and then someone hitting a delete key.
Front line support should only be able to suspend an account and any deletions should need duplicate approval.
Even at that stage it should enter an archive holding process for a reasonable period before it gets totally removed. And the client ordering the deletion should get sent the data in a readable format as well, either as a download, ftp or on a disk (suitable encrypted)
What makes me laugh is that as a SaaS provider thats what we do, why someone like Yahoo/Flickr cant adopt basic best practice for off site storage is laughable given there size and length of time in existence, this isnt exactly rocket science is it.
If its not content grab and control why are Apple stopping the Belgium newspaper Apps that allow access to content subscribed from elsewhere? Thats exactly the same as your Kindle explanation yet they have been stopped.
The point is that Apple are stopping people seeing content they have paid for securely elsewhere unless they use a browser.
If you want the content viewable via an app you have to pay the iTax so the simple answer is for companies to pull apps and go to browser delivered content, then everyone is happy, no need for the iTax or the waste of time and effort developing an App and the end user still gets to see what they have paid for.
Rewind to the launch of the iPad, the iPhone 3Gs and 4.0 etc at there peak and Apple could easily say to the content providers that the public have no choice so if you want your content on these peoples igadgets you go through us.
But now in 2011 the tablet market is broadening, the smartphone market is very mixed and on a per OS basis more people have an Android unit as its available in so many items that Apple dont have the leverage they had a year ago.
Combine that with a murdoch tie up and I suspect the content providers will either leave in droves or adopt a web page, non app approach to serving content across multiple platforms.
Ultimately that would be cheaper for the publisher than making multiple platform apps with multiple content feeds, just do an old fashioned website with a log in!
Apple need apps to keep interest in the products, if they drive away app providers they have to do it themselves.
It should be relatively easy to go cloudy with a book reader so your content and viewer and in the interwebs and viewed via a browser.
Not sure why your quoting the OP post, I was responding to your reply.
GPS to an accuracy of 10 metres versus "triangulation" in an area with low mast density, I would take GPS data every time for accuracy. You need more than one mast to triangulate, if your have masts 1000 metres apart which cross at the 800m radius then the nearest you can plot them to using triangulation is 801 metres which gives a pretty large search area as it can be anywhere within the 799 metre radius only covered by one mast.
Not sure why your quoting different agencies, the patriot act is not agency specific and is written in such a way that any law enforcement agency can use it to ask any company for data.
As for your final comment, the more data points you have to work with the more accurately you can locate something, but using wifi and other location points is very different to your original post about cell tower triangulation isnt it?
Cell tower triangulation is nowhere near as accurate as GPS when it comes to locating people, especially in non urban areas with lower tower density.
Given the choice, a live feed of gps data wins hands down.
Both companies, being 'merkins in the land of the free are bound by the patroit act to hand it all over. Freedom comes at a high price in the land of the free.
The greatest trick the devil played was to convince people he should decide what they install on the phones they have purchased!
That the sample at the scene was degraded and they had to use LCN DNA and it pointed to you even though it wasnt you ergo the Omagh bombing case
Or
Just before the attack you kissed her/him on the cheek and the recovered DNA was from your salivia, thats you sharing soap with big bubba for 25 years, after all thats your DNA in an intimate place.
What you dont realise is that the DNA at the scene isnt useless, the oft quoted Sally Bowman case was solved because a sample taken lawfully following an arrest some time later produced a match to the crime scene.
I will wager two things, one you havent voluntarily provided a life time sample to the police and, secondly, that you believe CSI Vegas, Miami, Grimsby et al are reflective of modern UK policing!
If your so adamant the system works pop down your local nick and volunteer your DNA, just remember when you do, DNA at crime scenes carries no real time stamp so you better hope you havent shed a hair,skin or anything else somewhere that ends up a crime scene!
"Newspapers are releasing free applications to customers and then are charging them for content via their own servers. So for all the work Apple does to host the app, test it and "promote" it on the app store Apple get sod all."
Actually by having those apps from higher end publications they draw in new purchasers of the iGadgets.
As Jobs doesnt allow you to install stuff from anywhere but iTunes he can now do this, had it been the case from the start I doubt any publication would have gone near the app store or Apple products if they had to surrender 30% of subscriber value to be able to deliver content to some of the readership.
The simple solution for the content providers is to drop the apps and run a web based version only thats runs on the flashless browser of the iPad/phone, then they can serve there own content, run there own subscriptions, serve adds and leave Apple with zip.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
